RugbyRebels

Raggs wrote:Lavinini is such a dirty player.

? For the fractional early taking of a lifter?

Bath's much more experienced team starting to tell. Just too many powerful runners for the very young Tigers team.

Good to see our defence has been drilled. I mean I literally cannot see any method to it at all, other than being passive.

FKAS wrote:

Raggs wrote:Lavinini is such a dirty player.

? For the fractional early taking of a lifter?

Bath's much more experienced team starting to tell. Just too many powerful runners for the very young Tigers team.

He has a lot of previous. Penalty magnet too.

Banquo wrote:

FKAS wrote:

Raggs wrote:Lavinini is such a dirty player.

? For the fractional early taking of a lifter?

Bath's much more experienced team starting to tell. Just too many powerful runners for the very young Tigers team.

He has a lot of previous. Penalty magnet too.

Yeah, I'd give benefit of the doubt to some players taking out the lifter, but him, not a bit.

Been pleased with Martin so far.

It is annoying that Bath tacklers are allowed to slowly roll over the Tigers ball before rolling away. Some pretty questionable forward passes, that try should never have been allowed.

Raggs wrote:

Banquo wrote:

FKAS wrote:
? For the fractional early taking of a lifter?

Bath's much more experienced team starting to tell. Just too many powerful runners for the very young Tigers team.

He has a lot of previous. Penalty magnet too.

Yeah, I'd give benefit of the doubt to some players taking out the lifter, but him, not a bit.

So you admit to having a biased view.

He's not really loved up to his reputation at Tigers. Does give away a penalty or two but they don't tend to be for dangerous things.

Redpath has shown some really nice touches, but this really is a ridiculous mismatch.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:Been pleased with Martin so far.

Then he knocks it on. Best Tigers player by a distance though.

FKAS wrote:

Raggs wrote:

Banquo wrote: He has a lot of previous. Penalty magnet too.

Yeah, I'd give benefit of the doubt to some players taking out the lifter, but him, not a bit.

So you admit to having a biased view.

He's not really loved up to his reputation at Tigers. Does give away a penalty or two but they don't tend to be for dangerous things.

Like taking out lifters? He got yellow carded for the same offence against wasps in February, which wasn't that many fixtures ago.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:Redpath has shown some really nice touches, but this really is a ridiculous mismatch.

Yep.

Raggs wrote:

FKAS wrote:

Raggs wrote:
Yeah, I'd give benefit of the doubt to some players taking out the lifter, but him, not a bit.

So you admit to having a biased view.

He's not really loved up to his reputation at Tigers. Does give away a penalty or two but they don't tend to be for dangerous things.

Like taking out lifters? He got yellow carded for the same offence against wasps in February, which wasn't that many fixtures ago.

But an offence a lot of second rows commit whilst trying to defend a lineout. If I remember the game rightly the ref was going to sin bin Cole but the TMO suggested Lavanini instead. It being both of them going early. If you've made your mind up before you watch the guy play I'm sure you'll find lots of things.

Lavanini plays up to the line because that's his job. You can't pull on the 4 shirt at Tigers and go out looking for a cuddle.

I think the real winner is that Tigers lineout has improved ....

I blame me for that

I’ve been quite impressed by Henry since he moved to 10. He plays nice and flat and has made some very nice miss passes off both hands.

Scrumhead wrote:I’ve been quite impressed by Henry since he moved to 10. He plays nice and flat and has made some very nice miss passes off both hands.

Almost like he's a 10 and not a 15.
It's a handy thing to have a bench option, but IMO needs to start at 10 over McPhilips.



I've been pleased with Leatigaga, Smith, Martin, White and Henry really.
Steward and Henderson have added stuff coming on.

Yes. Definitely would have been better to start Henry at 10.

Hardwick is always pretty decent as well. I don’t really know why he doesn’t get more game time at 12.

Job done for Bath. They were far too powerful and organised. Redpath good, Spencer very good, likewise Stuart.

Thought Martin stood up very well for Tigers and Henry did look better at 10.

Scrumhead wrote:I’ve been quite impressed by Henry since he moved to 10. He plays nice and flat and has made some very nice miss passes off both hands.

McPhillips was dire. So slow, no guile and those awful crossfield kicks. You can't do that against a team as good as Bath.

Henry was the opposite, he looks a real live wire ball in hand. Very handy addition but needs to be at 10. Ideally with Hardwick at 12 to look after the kicking from the tee.

What impressed me most about the Tigers youngsters was that they kept at it. Kept trying to play and really dominated the last quarter of the game. Too inaccurate in the Bath 22 otherwise we could have had more than the two tries. I think Dunn's most match interview sums it up well. Bath's team was significantly stronger and they would be disappointed to not control the game for the entirety. Tigers started really well and finished even better.

Looking forward to seeing more of Henderson, Martin and Steward. They all looked pretty comfortable at this level despite being teenagers.

Ben Spencer is a brilliant acquisition for Bath, he's given them a new dimension. Very much the general they were crying out for.

The annoying thing about that game is that it seemed like the "senior players" was the one that let us down on the whole.

Agreed - Lavanini just looked disinterested exemplified by his willingness to accept Matavesi’s dummy so easily

I've been completely unimpressed by him given his reputation.

Scrumhead wrote:Agreed - Lavanini just looked disinterested exemplified by his willingness to accept Matavesi’s dummy so easily

I'd be debating whether you should employ a back who fresh off the bench can't round a lock that's been playing for 50 minutes in that much space.

Having said that it was a rather lackluster performance. I'd have liked to see Lavanini look a little more feisty. He seemed to have a leadership role, there was the camera close up of him talking scrum positioning with Heyes after the early penalty in our favour. Maybe that took away from his game as it has done for Cole in the past when he was made captain. Some players should just be left to do their thing.

One thing Lavanini really needs to work on is his recovery after tackle. He's pretty slow getting back to his feet and getting into the defensive line which doesn't help as he's one of our big hitters and we were looking to him for a dominant hit. Far too few dominant hits in defence from Tigers today.

Banquo wrote:

FKAS wrote:

Raggs wrote:Lavinini is such a dirty player.

? For the fractional early taking of a lifter?

Bath's much more experienced team starting to tell. Just too many powerful runners for the very young Tigers team.

He has a lot of previous. Penalty magnet too.

Lavanini is powerful but a confirmed thug. Leicester signed the wrong Argie. His mate, Petit, is a world-class lock. Big, fast, athletic and smart.

Spiffy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

FKAS wrote:
? For the fractional early taking of a lifter?

Bath's much more experienced team starting to tell. Just too many powerful runners for the very young Tigers team.

He has a lot of previous. Penalty magnet too.

Lavanini is powerful but a confirmed thug. Leicester signed the wrong Argie. His mate, Petit, is a world-class lock. Big, fast, athletic and smart.

Tigers pack needed a nasty physical edge. Pre lockdown he offered that pretty well without picking up citings or red cards. I like Guido Petti as a player but he doesn't have the physical impact of Lavanini who is an absolute monster. There's noticeable impact to the scrum when Lavanini is involved and as a player he can be improved further which is what Borthwick will be looking at. Up his workrate, get him reloading in defence quicker so he can keep those big hits raining in.

Post lockdown Lavanini has struggled for the same effect on games. Whether it's because he's recently become a father and isn't getting enough sleep I don't know. On the upside his son will be EQ.

I’m with Spiffy. Guido Petti is a far better player IMO. I can’t say I’ve ever been impressed by Lavanini. He’s more notable for his all too regular (and deliberate) foul play than anything positive he contributes.